Complexity and information in invariant inference
Yotam M. Y. Feldman, Neil Immerman, Mooly Sagiv, Sharon Shoham
Abstract
This paper addresses the complexity of SAT-based invariant inference, a prominent approach to safety verification. We consider the problem of inferring an inductive invariant of polynomial length given a transition system and a safety property. We analyze the complexity of this problem in a black-box model, called the Hoare-query model, which is general enough to capture algorithms such as IC3/PDR and its variants. An algorithm in this model learns about the system's reachable states by querying the validity of Hoare triples.
We show that in general an algorithm in the Hoare-query model requires an exponential number of queries. Our lower bound is information-theoretic and applies even to computationally unrestricted algorithms, showing that no choice of generalization from the partial information obtained in a polynomial number of Hoare queries can lead to an efficient invariant inference procedure in this class.
We then show, for the first time, that by utilizing rich Hoare queries, as done in PDR, inference can be exponentially more efficient than approaches such as ICE learning, which only utilize inductiveness checks of candidates. We do so by constructing a class of transition systems for which a simple version of PDR with a single frame infers invariants in a polynomial number of queries, whereas every algorithm using only inductiveness checks and counterexamples requires an exponential number of queries.
Our results also shed light on connections and differences with the classical theory of exact concept learning with queries, and imply that learning from counterexamples to induction is harder than classical exact learning from labeled examples. This demonstrates that the convergence rate of Counterexample-Guided Inductive Synthesis depends on the form of counterexamples.
• Software and its engineering → Formal methods.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers5
- First-order quantified separatorsJason R. Koenig, Oded Padon, Neil Immerman, Alex AikenPLDI 2020 · 31 citations
- Everything is Good for Something: Counterexample-Guided Directed Fuzzing via Likely Invariant InferenceHeqing Huang, Anshunkang Zhou, Mathias Payer, Charles ZhangS&P 2024 · 15 citations
- Learning the boundary of inductive invariantsYotam M. Y. Feldman, Mooly Sagiv, Sharon Shoham, James R. WilcoxPOPL 2021 · 5 citations
- Property-directed reachability as abstract interpretation in the monotone theoryYotam M. Y. Feldman, Mooly Sagiv, Sharon Shoham, James R. WilcoxPOPL 2022 · 5 citations
- Data-driven Numerical Invariant Synthesis with Automatic Generation of AttributesAhmed Bouajjani, Wael-Amine Boutglay, Peter HabermehlCAV 2022 · 5 citations
Related papers
- Property Directed Reachability with Extended ResolutionAndrew Luka, Yakir VizelCAV 2025 · 2 citations
- Interval counterexamples for loop invariant learningRongchen Xu, Fei He, Bow-Yaw WangFSE 2020 · 19 citations
- RecurIC3: Exploiting Structural Lemma Reuse to Accelerate IC3Yuhan Li, Liangze Yin, Xinyi Gong, Minghao Liu et al.ISSTA 2026
- Predicting Lemmas in Generalization of IC3Yuheng Su, Qiusong Yang, Yiwei CiDAC 2024 · 8 citations
- Learning Symmetric Invariants from Symmetric SamplesZhijie Xu, Fei HeOOPSLA 2026
